2002
DOI: 10.1007/bf03402006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Methods for Prediction of Peptide Binding to MHC Molecules: A Comparative Study

Abstract: Background: A variety of methods for prediction of peptide binding to major histocompatibility complex (MHC) have been proposed. These methods are based on binding motifs, binding matrices, hidden Markov models (HMM), or artificial neural networks (ANN). There has been little prior work on the comparative analysis of these methods. Materials and Methods: We performed a comparison of the performance of six methods applied to the prediction of two human MHC class I molecules, including binding matrices and motif… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
111
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 133 publications
(111 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
111
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This SVM was trained using MHCPEP and SYFPEITHI. As a result, it showed very high performance, better than SVMHC (53) and YKW0201 (90). In Formulae 2, 3 formulae from each group are exemplified and the correspondence of energetic terms among them can be seen beyond the groups, as indicated with solid lines.…”
Section: Empirical Scoring Function Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This SVM was trained using MHCPEP and SYFPEITHI. As a result, it showed very high performance, better than SVMHC (53) and YKW0201 (90). In Formulae 2, 3 formulae from each group are exemplified and the correspondence of energetic terms among them can be seen beyond the groups, as indicated with solid lines.…”
Section: Empirical Scoring Function Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the fact that ANNs are dominated by the remaining methods is notable, as they have been the most widely used method in the MHC -peptide binding setting. While ANNs, in turn, dominate simple motif-based classifiers (Brusic et al (1997);Yu et al (2002)), our results indicate that they are not competitive with more credible approaches such as SVMs and ensemble methods. This poor performance is compounded by the tuning sensitivity and black-box nature of ANNs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…Specialized web-based servers and analysis software allow a statistical prediction of characteristics, such as cellular location, hydrophobicity, secondary and tertiary structure, and potential epitopes (Zhang et al, 1998;Yu et al, 2002).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%